- Latingp - lists.icann.org

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 5 September 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Sept. 5, 2019

Sept. 5, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 5 September 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Organize the Latin GP meeting with IP session during ICANN66 as discussed by the GP.PK 2Continue discussing the disposition of SSà ß on the mailing listALL This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0

Underlining
by Bill Jouris Sept. 5, 2019

Sept. 5, 2019

Dear colleagues, As requested, I have updated the Proposal (Section 6.7.1) with our decisions for Variants Due To Underlining. I would like to note one small inconsistency in our results. Basic letters are considered variants of the same letter with a cedilla for letters K, L, N, S, and T. But not for letters C, M, and O. It seems to me that we really ought to be consistent in this. (As we are for Dot Below, Macron Below, Circumflex Below, Ogonek, etc.) Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris(a)insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)

3 4

Latin GP meeting
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Sept. 5, 2019

Sept. 5, 2019

Dear Latin GP member, This is a gentle reminder for the Latin GP meeting today, Thursday 5 September 2019, 16:00 UTC. Please connect to the meeting at https://icann.zoom.us/j/922577525. AGENDA for the GP call on September the 5th, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Planning meeting with Integration Panel during ICANN-Montreal on Mon, 4 Nov. (15:15-16:45) 3. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility - Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_presen…> 4. Finalization of the topic "Sharp s vs ss", page 61 in the Report 5. Stacking with combining diacritics [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> - discussion 6. Next meeting proposal September the 12th, 2019, 16:00UTC 7. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP - Report version 5 schedule [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_spread…> 2. Meikal's Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… [onedrive.live.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__onedrive.live.com_view…> Panel members contributions are in Appendix D [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_drive…> 3. Apendix D Merger [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> made by Meikal 4. Trello board with In-script analysis items [trello.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__trello.com_c_BoKkXTzF_…> 5. Bill's table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… [dropbox.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.dropbox.com_previe…> 6. Bill's finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… [dropbox.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.dropbox.com_previe…> Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 7. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility - Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 8. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_presen…> produced by Dennis Regards, Pitinan

1 0

AGENDA for the GP call on September the 5th, 2019, 16:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Sept. 4, 2019

Sept. 4, 2019

Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. The agenda is almost the same as it was last six calls, only dates of calls are changed. Any comments are welcome. Pitinan will send the remainder on time. All links to relevant working documents could be found at the end of this document in the section REMINDERS. Regards Mirjana ___________________________________________ AGENDA for the GP call on September the 5th, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Planning meeting with Integration Panel during ICANN-Montreal on Mon, 4 Nov. (15:15-16:45) 3. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> 4. Finalization of the topic “Sharp s vs ss”, page 61 in the Report 5. Stacking with combining diacritics<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt…> - discussion 6. Next meeting proposal September the 12th, 2019, 16:00UTC 7. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP – Report version 5 schedule<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1siFPKNqSr-YGj0DKurvS3hcoa8Y8eAJUBHp…> 2. Meikal’s Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… Panel members contributions are in Appendix D<https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13OI1Yb9RO2Z_l4C0hbFCZ8xVONxdwqBU> 1. Apendix D Merger<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGIerPh21yxPHuuSyNo2uShanvFzD0MUb1ai6QV…> made by Meikal 2. Trello board with In-script analysis items<https://trello.com/c/BoKkXTzF/1-in-script-variants-analysis> 3. Bill’s table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… 4. Bill’s finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… 1. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 2. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> produced by Dennis

1 0

Greek-Latin cross-script variants
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Sept. 2, 2019

Sept. 2, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, We are writing to seek for Latin GP’s feedback regarding the Greek-Latin cross-script variants. The Greek GP has shared the first version of Greek LGR proposal with the IP and the IP has shared the following comment. Please review the IP communication and the questions below and kindly share you feedback with us. For any further queries, kindly let us know. Regards, Pitinan To: Latin GP From: Integration Panel Subject: Greek-Latin cross-script variants Date: Aug 9, 2019 We have become aware of a Draft of the Greek LGR proposal in which a number of cross-script variants are defined between Greek and Latin. We are in the process of evaluating these and drafting our response. Some of the proposed cross-script variants would, if accepted, impose in-script variants for the Latin script. We would like to appraise the Latin GP of these and would like to get the GP's reaction to these proposals. In principle, each LGR defines its own set of variants, appropriate to its user community, and integration results in the common superset. However, when this process would result in imposing in-script variants between two characters that are both in another script, the bar for accepting such variants for integration has to be necessarily rather higher. Please review the following table and in particular the cases where a single Greek character is proposed to map to more than one Latin variant. Greek LetterLatin Letter U+03B1 αGreek small letter ALPHAɑ U+0251Latin small letter ALPHA U+03B3 γGreek small letter GAMMAɣ U+0263Latin small letter GAMMA U+03B5 εGreek small letter EPSILONɛ U+025BLatin small letter OPEN E U+03B7 ηGreek small letter ETAn U+006ELatin small letter Nņ U+0146Latin small letter N WITH CEDILLAŋ U+014BLatin small letter ENGṇ U+1E47Latin small letter N WITH DOT BELOW U+03B9 ιGreek small letter IOTAɩ U+0269Latin small letter IOTA U+03BD νGreek small letter NUv U+0076Latin small letter Vṿ U+1E7FLatin small letter V WITH DOT BELOW U+03BF οGreek small letter OMICRONo U+006FLatin small letter Oọ U+1ECDLatin small letter O WITH DOT BELOW U+03C5 υGreek small letter UPSILONʋ U+028BLatin small letter V WITH HOOK U+03AE ήGreek small letter ETA WITH TONOSń U+0144Latin small letter N WITH ACUTE U+03AF ίGreek small letter IOTA WITH TONOSi U+0069Latin small letter Iì U+00ECLatin small letter I WITH GRAVEí U+00EDLatin small letter I WITH ACUTE U+03CC όGreek small letter OMICRON WITH TONOSò U+00F2Latin small letter O WITH GRAVEó U+00F3Latin small letter O WITH ACUTEȯ U+022FLatin small letter O WITH DOT ABOVE U+03CA ϊGreek small letter IOTA WITH DIALYTIKAï U+00EFLatin small letter I WITH DIAERESIS U+03CB ϋGreek small letter UPSILON WITH DIALYTIKAü U+00FCLatin small letter U WITH DIAERESIS (Note that elsewhere in the Greek proposal the accented forms of IOTA, OMICRON and UPSILON are proposed to become in-script variants in Greek. For reasons of transitivity, any Latin cross-script variants would also have to become variants, for example Latin U+028B and U+00FC would end up as variants of each other because U+03C5 and U+03CB are proposed to be in-script variants in Greek. This is not apparent from the way the cross-script variants are listed above.). We are looking for answers to these three questions: (1) Which of these proposed variants match corresponding variants that the Latin GP is in the process of defining? (2) Which additional Latin/Greek variants (not listed above) are being considered by the Latin GP? (3) Which of the proposed in-script variants for Latin would be considered problematic for the Latin GP? Your prompt response would be appreciated, -IP

2 1

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 29 August 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 29 August 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Draft the underlining analysis section in the proposal.BJ, MM This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0

AGENDA for the GP call on August the 29th, 2019, 16:00UTC
by Mirjana Tasić Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear GP members. Please find enclosed the Agenda proposal for our next telephone conference. The agenda is the same as it was last five calls, only dates of calls are changed. Any comments are welcome. Pitinan will send the remainder on time. All links to relevant working documents could be found at the end of this document in the section REMINDERS. Regards Mirjana ___________________________________________ AGENDA for the GP call on August the 29th, 2019, 16:00UTC 1. Roll call 2. Discussion on Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>, IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> 3. Finalization of the topic “Sharp s vs ss”, page 61 in the Report 4. Stacking with combining diacritics<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt…> - discussion 5. Next meeting proposal September the 5th, 2019, 16:00UTC 6. AOB REMINDERS 1. Latin GP – Report version 5 schedule<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1siFPKNqSr-YGj0DKurvS3hcoa8Y8eAJUBHp…> 2. Meikal’s Template for Appendix D on Variants https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=10C636851F7DD403!612296&ithint=fi… Panel members contributions are in Appendix D<https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13OI1Yb9RO2Z_l4C0hbFCZ8xVONxdwqBU> 1. Apendix D Merger<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nGIerPh21yxPHuuSyNo2uShanvFzD0MUb1ai6QV…> made by Meikal 2. Trello board with In-script analysis items<https://trello.com/c/BoKkXTzF/1-in-script-variants-analysis> 3. Bill’s table with code points collected for visual similarity analysis https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-%20In-Scri… 4. Bill’s finding on Stacking with Combining Diacritics (Attachment: Combining Diacritics and Stacking.pdf) Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Latin%20GP/InScriptVariants/Bill-CombiningD… Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKJ-NF5MnRllFiz7iaa5hsmyNpg5oxPxqBl2MNt… 1. Dennis contribution Appendix: IDNA Compatibility – Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) 00DF [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 2. IDNA2003 compatibility issues slides 8/1 <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Pey1tE1q3KnvbKtiSjaUNsaVC_AXhwmaLgP…> produced by Dennis

3 3

Latin GP meeting
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 28, 2019

Aug. 28, 2019

1 0

Latin Small Letter Sharp S (ß) U+00DF
by Bill Jouris Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Dear colleagues, I had a couple of thoughts over the weekend. First, I think that in order to make progress we need to unpack our analysis a little. In particular, we need to consider each option, for both misconnection and failure of connection, separately for IDNA 2003 and for IDNA 2008. Then we will have the information in front of us to decide how much of a problem we have. For example, consider Option 2 (Sharp S and double S as blocked variants). (For this discussion, assume a TLD using the Sharp S exists. Thus the TLD which only differs by having a double S is blocked.) If the user enters a valid domain name using the Sharp S, on a browser which uses IDNA 2003, the browser converts it to double s before going to the DNS. The DNS doesn't find the name, and so the connection fails. Whereas a browser with IDNA 2008 goes to the DNS with the correct name, and the connection succeeds. Does this constitute a change of behavior? Absolutely. But is this change, "instability" if you will, a significant problem? I would suggest that it is not. To call it a significant problem is to argue that bugs should not be fixed. A bug fix, after all, necessarily results in a change of behavior; that is its whole purpose. Back-level software (which IDNA 2003 is) will always give problematic results. That's why we upgrade. Certainly an ideal solution will have no misconnection under either level of IDNA, and no failed connection when the user enters a valid domain name. But unless we find such a paragon, we will need to find the "least bad" solution. And having this additional data in front of us will help with that. Second, I want to comment on the Option for Sharp S and double S with no variant relationship. I have a question for those who are more fluent in German than I -- which is most of you. Are there any examples of two different German words which are identical except that one is rendered with a Sharp S and the other is rendered strictly with a double S? It seems to me that, unless there are, a "not variant" judgement is unsustainable and the option should be rejected out of hand. Regardless of what this analysis might find. Bill Jouris Inside Products bill.jouris(a)insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct)

5 6

Summary of Latin GP Meeting on 22 August 2019
by Pitinan Kooarmornpatana Aug. 23, 2019

Aug. 23, 2019

Dear Latin GP members, Please find attached the summary of the Latin GP meeting on 22 August 2019. Please let us know if you would like to suggest any edits or additions. Action Items S. No.Action ItemsOwner 1Expand the cases in the slide ‘IDNA 2003 Compatibility Issues - Sharp S’ to cover two possible cases of ‘Misconnection’. DT, MM This summary and the recording are also posted at the Latin Wiki Page at https://community.icann.org/display/croscomlgrprocedure/Latin+GP Regards, Pitinan

1 0